Create an Account
username: password:
 
  MemeStreams Logo

MemeStreams Discussion

search


This page contains all of the posts and discussion on MemeStreams referencing the following web page: Why we are loosing the War on Terror.... You can find discussions on MemeStreams as you surf the web, even if you aren't a MemeStreams member, using the Threads Bookmarklet.

Why we are loosing the War on Terror...
by fortinbras at 7:45 pm EDT, Aug 14, 2006

Why we are loosing the War on Terror... Rhetoric must be backed by domination... We do not have the balls to hit back any more... We are no longer a dominant force in the world...

It took two large detonations to break the will of the Shinto's in Japan. What is it really going to take to break the will of the Islamic Fascists?

If the USA, UK or even the Israelis continue to value the lives of enemy civilians, then we will lose the war on terror. It is plain to see; the Islamic Fascists only understand martyrdom and/or annihilation; brute force. If we continue to allow them to use their power without a decisive response, we are going to be the group annihilated.

However, if we hit back with truly overwhelming force, not only would we destroy the bad guys, but we'd devastate the will of those that might be recruited into the new ranks of Islamic Fascists; further we would annihilate the support of the enemy civilians.

When we carpet bombed the Nazi's in WWII and then rolled down the streets of Berlin; we not only killed enemy military personnel, we killed enemy civilians. When we detonated two nuclear bombs in Japan, we destroyed military, industrial infrastructure and a very larger civilian population.

We understood, back then, the civilian population allowed a political force and vicariously a military force to exist. It was the civilians that ultimately submitted to the power of the dominant, radical and ruthless.

What does this mean?

Civilians that allow Islamic Fascism to exist are viable targets.


 
RE: Why we are loosing the War on Terror...
by Decius at 2:50 am EDT, Aug 15, 2006

fortinbras wrote:
It took two large detonations to break the will of the Shinto's in Japan.

That may have had more to do with Russia then the Japanese. See the quotes here from various U.S. Generals at the time. If it wasn't nessecary to win in the Pacific, then it could only have been a threat to Russia.

I'm not ready to accept the idea that genocide is the only solution to Islamic fundamentalism. They don't seem enough of a threat to warrant that sort of response. I'm not at all worried that they're going to start taking over Western countries. They aren't the Soviet Union. They murder innocent people, sometimes my countrymen, but mostly other muslims, and you're talking about doing the same. They push my government to undermine my civil liberties, and that pisses me off, but not enough to kill hundreds of thousands of people over it. An airport search is highly annoying, but I wouldn't kill three innocent people to get rid of it. There are other ways.

Maybe I don't yet have the conviction needed to face the reality of the problem. I'm not convinced that this situation won't, in the final analysis, require what you advocate, but I don't think most people are there yet. I would prefer a reformation within Islam that rejects its radicalism. A great moderate Islamic leader... The arguements are easy. The right person need only decide to make them. One way or the other, fundamentalism is the past, and not the future.


 
 
Powered By Industrial Memetics